why dont they move 'homeless' families out of Dublin to rural parts of Ireland?

corner of hells

pgj2015 wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

All them ?

I've a couple of minutes before I head out to do a night of break ins , so do elaborate.

Any dubs who have been moved down the country to free houses have always caused trouble, they come down with that im from dublin so im hard and somehow special attitude, the ridiculous walk and attitude problem, become know to the guards very soon.

Do describe the walk ?
I'm a Dub living in "de country" , by the way.

end of the road

Idbatterim wrote: »

all of irelands other towns have these, cork, limerick, waterford, galway...

and as these people wouldn't be housed in those cities, it won't change the actual realities that Fann Linn mentioned, realities you would know nothing about with the greatist of respect.

Idbatterim wrote: »

exactly! another 23 floor building is being built on sir john rogersons quay, amazing views etc, its going to be a prestige apartment block to live it, unlike ballymun, but again, I am sure it is all the buildings fault! LOL

you know exactly what the original comment meant. the ballymun flats were put up with no amenities and the people effectively left to fend for themselves. there was no thought given to the fact that eventually the people who originally moved in would get older and that no amenities and no oversight would lead to social problems.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Terrible isn't it that people might have to pay something towards their way of life.

Think of the savings they make not having to drive the kids to school or drive to the supermarket. Win win.

no, it's not terrible that someone would have to pay for something. however, as these people would be moving from an area where they can afford to pay for most things, to an area where they have now got extra costs, and on top of that they may have to give up their jobs, that means i have to pay out more in wellfare. and yes they will have to drive places, and of course we know people's opinions of people who may be on wellfare or struggling with housing having a car.

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

I live in a rural area. My children get the bus to school. For 1 child the school bus cost, for the year (9-10 months/roughly 36 weeks) is €110. That works out at about €3 a week for my child to get to and from school. I actually have 3 children using the bus, and the total cost of the bus for the year is capped at €220. That works out at about €6 per week for the 3 of them (€2 each per week).

I don't think that's "a good bit of money". Then again, I'm used to having to pay for things that I need to use.

i'm also used to paying for things that i need to use. however i also recognise that some may not be able to afford to do so as much as they would want to.

Fann Linn

Fann Linn wrote: »

Is there any coco housing left in Athlone?
I dont think so.
Planning permissions also being reduced in south of the county so as to encourage development in the northern part.

There's quite a bit of property that wasn't completely finished or was held under Nama. Quicker than building from scratch.

It's interesting that there is housing for all our immigrants but nothing for these Dubliners.

And TBH I'm not suggesting that Athlone take all 8k homeless... but it could take a thousand of them. So too could a dozen of other semi sized towns in the midlands/east side of Ireland. Or even just send them to the bigger towns along the Dublin-galway road.

The problem with the objections I've heard is that you seek to shut down any possibility of sending the homeless outside of Dublin. Everywhere outside of Dublin is too difficult, too small, too expensive, etc. The focus is entirely on fixing the issue in Dublin...

pjohnson wrote: »

Athlone is the contryside?

A rather decent part of Athlones' population is living in the countryside. But no, I wouldn't normally consider Athlone to be the countryside.

end of the road wrote: »

again this is not viable due to cost. if it was cheaper to house these people in rural areas they would be there. the reality is it's either going to be more expensive, or it's going to become a bunch of dumping grounds which will end up with social problems that will cost us more then what we were trying to solve.

Still waiting on all these missing or inadequate necessary services...

James 007

Barry Badrinath wrote: »

Move all the culchies out of Dublin, free up some space. Problem solved.

Go away boggers.

Dublin would turn into a ghetto full of unemployed no jobber wanabees and the economy would collapse if this was to happen. The economy is very dependant on qualified country professionals who value education and learning. Moving homeless people from Dublin to the countryside would not be acceptable either. Country people go back to their families and holiday homes several times a year simply to get away from the 'howya's' etc, besides that they wouldn't allow it anyway. Homeless dublin people need to get up off there arses and get a proper education and quit playing the system for the welfare and child benefits, the hard earned taxes taken from hard working country people.

Dakota Dan

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

I live in a rural area. My children get the bus to school. For 1 child the school bus cost, for the year (9-10 months/roughly 36 weeks) is €110. That works out at about €3 a week for my child to get to and from school. I actually have 3 children using the bus, and the total cost of the bus for the year is capped at €220. That works out at about €6 per week for the 3 of them (€2 each per week).

I don't think that's "a good bit of money". Then again, I'm used to having to pay for things that I need to use.

We were paying 600/Child/year nearly 10 years ago, what part of the country are you in to get special rates?

end of the road

suicide_circus wrote: »

People need to be told "No"

No, you can't choose where you live because you're not paying for it.

I cannot think of a single ethical difficulty with this idea. When you're living on the state's dollar you shouldn't get MORE choices than the working poor - that would be immoral.

It's the infantilisation of grown adults - they are like toddlers holding their breath until they get their way.

NO NO NO.

the fact that your not paying for it is irrelevant to whether you can choose where to live or not, the only thing you are paying for is the building you live in . the area is just a way to screw more money out of you. those living on wellfare don't get more choices then the working poor and even if they did there is nothing immoral about it, as it would be done for necessary reasons.

Oranage2

If the government took a strong stance on career welfare recipients, it may encourage these people to actually not choose this way of life.

But I feel that these work-shy over-entitled delicate daffodils are not about self improvement And they need to be bubble wrapped through life.

It's funny how the arguments are basically

Cut welfare = these people will commit more crime

Give this people 1 choice of a forever home = too far away from their support network and they will end up homeless

mariaalice

There is a real sense of Othering from this thread its ludicrous the 'homeless' are not some homogeneous group that can just be banished. There is homelessness in other parts of Ireland not just Dublin and finely do the rural communities that the homelessness are to be banished to get any say.

BillyBobBS

What a boards thread bashing the homeless and those down on their luck. This must be a first?

yosser hughes

mariaalice wrote: »

There is a real sense of Othering from this thread its ludicrous the 'homeless' are not some homogeneous group that just be banished. There is homelessness in other parts of Ireland not just Dublin and finely do the rural communities that the homelessness are to be banished to get any say.

"Othering" Straight out of an Arts and Humanities textbook.
predictable and pathetic

mariaalice

yosser hughes wrote: »

"Othering" Straight out of an Arts and Humanities textbook.
predictable and pathetic

But that exactly what it is a belief or sense that the 'homeless' are a different group that the normal or average Irish person do not have any kinship with.

0ph0rce0

BillyBobBS wrote: »

What a boards thread bashing the homeless and those down on their luck. This must be a first?

Unless your sleeping in a cardboard box on the street your not homeless. Bollocks that.

No way the majority of the "HOMELESS" have nowhere to go. Don't believe it for a second.

Bunch a mooching cnuts.


But the government? bunch of useless cnuts too. 40 Million for 14 families in a hotel for a year.

2.8 Million each?? That's a Killiney gaff and expenses for a year for each family and more.

end of the road

Oranage2 wrote: »

If the government took a strong stance on career welfare recipients, it may encourage these people to actually not choose this way of life.

the very tiny minority who choose wellfare would do so regardless. they don't want to work and no employer wants them.

Oranage2 wrote: »

But I feel that these work-shy over-entitled delicate daffodils are not about self improvement And they need to be bubble wrapped through life.

correct. i no more like it then you but it is what it is unfortunately.

Oranage2 wrote: »

It's funny how the arguments are basically

Cut welfare = these people will commit more crime

Give this people 1 choice of a forever home = too far away from their support network and they will end up homeless

because unfortunately experience from other countries which don't have a wellfare system or a reduced one shows those arguments to be accurate.

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

Unless your sleeping in a cardboard box on the street your not homeless. Bollocks that.

No way the majority of the "HOMELESS" have nowhere to go. Don't believe it for a second.

Bunch a mooching cnuts.


But the government? bunch of useless cnuts too. 40 Million for 14 families in a hotel for a year.

2.8 Million each?? That's a Killiney gaff and expenses for a year for each family and more.

the vast majority of those families are not a "Bunch a mooching cnuts"
they are families down on their luck. no, they are not homeless, but their accommodation situation isn't sustainible.

0ph0rce0

end of the road wrote: »

the vast majority of those families are not a "Bunch a mooching cnuts"
they are families down on their luck. no, they are not homeless, but their accommodation situation isn't sustainible.

I'd love to see some stats on how many of the people in emergency accommodation / on the housing lists are actually people that are / were down on their luck, How many people that had jobs even at say average salaries of 30k ish a piece and lost them, people that had a house and lost it etc...

I reckon it's fcuk all. Those people moved home, went back to college or started some sort of adult education, upskilled or got a better job and got back into the market or into private rented accommodation.

It never seems to be John or Jane single person in these situations It's John & Jane 50 kids.

corner of hells

Couldn't give you any stats , but seen lots genuinely down on their luck from all walks of life , ex firemen , soldiers , accountants , a solicitor, lots of tradesmen and lots of individuals with marital break ups.

yosser hughes

corner of hells wrote: »

Couldn't give you any stats , but seen lots genuinely down on their luck from all walks of life , ex firemen , soldiers , accountants , a solicitor, lots of tradesmen and lots of individuals with marital break ups.

No, you couldn't. The vast majority of 'homeless' are there by choice or have never tried in life.
They're not 'down on their luck' Luck had nothing to do with it.
Having kids when you have never had a job and no intention of ever getting one and rely on other workers to support you; is an absolute disgrace.
Apologists and bleeding heart merchants if anything, exacerbate the problem and actually condemn people to a life on welfare. It's infnatilsation and it's not what the original welfare state envisioned. It should never have become a way of life, but it has and this has been propagated by the left who feel a life of welfare is all people want and deserve.

0ph0rce0

corner of hells wrote: »

Couldn't give you any stats , but seen lots genuinely down on their luck from all walks of life , ex firemen , soldiers , accountants , a solicitor, lots of tradesmen and lots of individuals with marital break ups.

And I'm not doubting that there are always genuine people that need help. It just annoys me that people give you stick for even the mention of the scroungers which I would believe most these people are. What parent lets thier child and grandchildren sleep in hostels. None that's who. Even if you only had a couch to give you would.

Is it their fault? I don't know probably not? Is it the Governments fault? Probably/ Probably not?

Have a look here at the attached. This is the application for social housing. You can choose were you wan't to live. Take Dun Laoghaire for instance.

Foxrock, Mount Merrion, Blackrock, Stillorgan, Killiney, Dalkey just to name a few. These places even when the country was at it's lowest the houses in these areas still can get 1, 2, 3, 4 Million plus.


Take away the options, You take whats offered, You get no choice and that's that. You'd soon see the list getting shorter

corner of hells

yosser hughes wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

Couldn't give you any stats , but seen lots genuinely down on their luck from all walks of life , ex firemen , soldiers , accountants , a solicitor, lots of tradesmen and lots of individuals with marital break ups.

No, you couldn't. The vast majority of 'homeless' are there by choice or have never tried in life.
They're not 'down on their luck' Luck had nothing to do with it.
Having kids when you have never had a job and no intention of ever getting one and rely on other workers to support you is an absolute disgrace.

I dunno., I don't work so much with families ,more so homeless individuals and couples in a low threshold environment.
Lots of significant mental health and physical disabilities, chronic drug use etc.
I can certainly think of a few , maybe a handful that are playing the system looking for "that" local authhority property but most are not there by choice.

wakka12

wakka12 wrote: »

Because, even homeless people have family and friend ties and I think its unfair to give somebody a housing option so far outside the city they are from.

By the age of 12, 7 of my older brothers and sisters had left Ireland for good. Back in the 1950s both my parents had to emigrate, coming home in the mid-1960s when the economy picked up. For economic reasons, millions upon millions of Irish people since 1845 have not had the luxury of staying at home with friends and family, be it having to leave rural Ireland for an Irish city or leave Ireland entirely for other countries. Leaving one's home area permanently is, I suggest, the real experience of a large majority of Irish people.

I fully appreciate that there are people - particularly young mothers - who need extra support and compassion from close family and friends and associate being away from home with loneliness and isolation and therefore further mental health issues. However, nobody is saying they should move to some uninhabited island off Connacht. There are plenty of areas in rural Ireland with excellent supports and, like most other Irish people, they will just have to build up new friendships when they move to a new area. After all, we all have to make that basic effort at making networks in our workplaces never mind in our private lives.

Beggars can't be choosers might sound harsh, but it is a reality which applies to us all in some area of our lives - whether it's doing crappy aspects of our jobs or having to put up with certain people that we'd rather not put up with. We don't have the luxury to say 'No' to many things, thanks in large part to our need to pay our mortgage/rent every month. In this context, I think people rejecting an offer of a free/very cheap nice house in rural Ireland in the hope that they'll get a nice house in Dublin should lose their place on the housing list. No debate. Brazen chancers, but also disturbingly ruthless: how many people would choose to raise their young children in one-room temporary accommodation for years in the hope of getting a home in Dublin versus getting a much bigger, nicer home in rural Ireland fairly quickly?

corner of hells

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

corner of hells wrote: »

Couldn't give you any stats , but seen lots genuinely down on their luck from all walks of life , ex firemen , soldiers , accountants , a solicitor, lots of tradesmen and lots of individuals with marital break ups.

And I'm not doubting that there are always genuine people that need help. It just annoys me that people give you stick for even the mention of the scroungers which I would believe most these people are. What parent lets thier child and grandchildren sleep in hostels. None that's who. Even if you only had a couch to give you would.

Is it their fault? I don't know probably not? Is it the Governments fault? Probably/ Probably not?

Have a look here at the attached. This is the application for social housing. You can choose were you wan't to live. Take Dun Laoghaire for instance.

Foxrock, Mount Merrion, Blackrock, Stillorgan, Killiney, Dalkey just to name a few. These places even when the country was at it's lowest the houses in these areas still can get 1, 2, 3, 4 Million plus.


Take away the options, You take whats offered, You get no choice and that's that. You'd soon see the list getting shorter

We're going to have to agree to differ on this one , very few homeless in hostels id call scroungers , I'd agree with you about the issue with housing lists .

1eg0a3xv7b82of

The key thing is to keep them in Dublin, try and stop the spread any further.

Dravokivich

topper75 wrote: »

You are forgetting that we have a min wage in this country by law. There is no job in Ireland that would see them unable to pay for the commute from affordable villages. Things would get tighter and luxuries would be foregone, but that is what economics is all about - prioritizing expenditure when resources are limited. Alternatively there would have to be a short period of transitional employment and they get work elsewhere.

It is just another excuse and the 'entitlement' culture has to end. If the state is paying the roof over your head then the state can put you wherever they might choose. If you insist on Dublin - fine - but YOU pay for Dublin.

Reasons are excuses. Good work there. No, people's circumstances don't get worse... It's definitely got to be something about them ill thoughtfully having kids.

Damn them all.

irishproduce

Delighted Conor Skehan retained his position today. I was worried he'd be subject to the George Hook treatment and get the bullet for saying things a lot of us are thinking.

Andy From Sligo

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

You can excuse one accident, maybe even 2, but people with 3 or 4 kids who can't afford them must be braindead, or trying to work the system. It's not the 1950s, contraception is available.

blame the irish catholic church for that as well their ethos used to be "go forth and multiply" and are against contraception - maybe they would like to contribute to the homeless situation .. come to think of it why dont they if they dont already - why does it fall back to the government/tax payers to sort out homeless people .... surely the churches in ireland can buy up some properties across ireland and house people if they dont already .. the churches in Ireland seem to have a lot of money ... especially the catholic ones

Andy From Sligo

Dakota Dan wrote: »

They are made when female goats are mounted by male goats when the female goat is in heat.

your kidding me

Andy From Sligo

pgj2015 wrote: »

And raise crime rates, lets be honest, any dubs iv seen moved to the countryside have cause nothing but trouble.

yeah but more population and more crime will equal all those closed Garda stations in rural Ireland being opened up again

Andy From Sligo

pgj2015 wrote: »

Any dubs who have been moved down the country to free houses have always caused trouble, they come down with that im from dublin so im hard and somehow special attitude, the ridiculous walk and attitude problem, become know to the guards very soon.

if the local Rural Garda station has not closed ....

Joeseph Balls

Imagine the homeless moving down with us mucksavages, muckarses, etc, the shame.

Andy From Sligo

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

I live in a rural area. My children get the bus to school. For 1 child the school bus cost, for the year (9-10 months/roughly 36 weeks) is €110. That works out at about €3 a week for my child to get to and from school. I actually have 3 children using the bus, and the total cost of the bus for the year is capped at €220. That works out at about €6 per week for the 3 of them (€2 each per week).

I don't think that's "a good bit of money". Then again, I'm used to having to pay for things that I need to use.

.. or of course you could save 6euro a week by not sending your children to school - then you could put the 6euro a week to getting shopping delivered / extra food / treats ...

Gatling

Andy From Sligo wrote: »

.. or of course you could save 6euro a week by not sending your children to school - then you could put the 6euro a week to getting shopping delivered / extra food / treats ...

I live in Dublin and bus fare for my 2 kids for 36 weeks comes around €720 for the year ,
And people think school bus fares outside Dublin is a deal breaker .
Jeez